VOLUME 6 NUMBER 2 - FEBRUARY 20, 2001
Bibb County, Alabama cedes sovereignty to a Public/Private
Partnership!
Congressman Spencer Bachus from Alabama's 6th Congressional District introduced H.R. 4286 in the spring of 2000. President Clinton signed the bill in the fall of 2000. Thirty five hundred acres of Bibb County is now designated as the Cahaba River National Wildlife Refuge. Congressman Bachus press release quotes Wendy Allen Director of Protection for the Alabama Chapter of The Nature Conservancy: "This project is a great example of a public/private partnership that brings business, private landowners, local citizens, the federal government and a major conservation organization together for a win-win situation that benefits our remarkable natural heritage." This "public/private partnership" includes three organizations. Lets look at the goals of the three main players in this "partnership".
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has established a managerial plan called Ecosystem Conservation. The USFWS website begins by asking the question - What is an Ecosystem?
Answer:
"It is a geographic area including all the living organisms (people, plants, animals, and microorganisms), their physical surroundings (such as soil, water, and air), and the natural cycles that sustain them. All of these elements are interconnected. Managing any one resource affects the others in that ecosystem. Ecosystems can be small (a single stand of aspen) or large (an entire watershed including hundreds of forest stands across many different ownerships)." http://ecosystems.fws.gov/
We live in an age when the meaning of words are changed to suit the purpose of those who espouse a different ethic. An example is the word - gay. The meaning of this word has been totally changed by individuals who wish to redefine good and bad. Our observations of today's society indicates they have been quite successful. In the quote above we find people, plants, animals, microorganisms, soil, water and air all listed as resources within an ecosystem. Ergo, we are now referring to people as "human resources." It took years for the homosexual agenda to change the meaning of the word gay. Similarly, acceptance of the change in the meaning of "human resources" has taken decades.
During the fifties the title of the Dept of Pension and Securities was changed to the Dept of Welfare, later it was changed to the Dept of Human Resources. One of the professional wordsmiths of our society--the newspapers--have, for sometime included a "human resource" list in the economic section of the paper. Defining human resource may help us understand the goals of the "public/private partnerships:"
First lets define a resource:
A human is a created being, endowed with inalienable rights. At his discretion his talents may be utilized to aid someone, but he should never be considered a "something" for someone else to use. This condition is normally called slavery. Just as society has been conditioned to accept the new meaning of "gay" we now seem to find the concept of "human resource" acceptable.
Notice that the USFWS plans to manage "all the living organisms (people, plants, animals, and microorganisms), their surroundings (such as soil, water, and air), and the natural cycles that sustains them". Gee! who needs God anymore? The USFWS can do it all.
Is Ecosystems Conservation limited to the National Wildlife Refuge?
"We all realize that we are not going to achieve conservation within the boundaries of a National Wildlife Refuge, that we are not going to restore aquatic resources with a National Fish Hatchery, and that listing an endangered species is not going to conserve the system. All of these are interconnected. If we disturb or manage one, all of the others will be affected. "
Paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson: If government is to dictate when to sow and when to reap, it will not be long before starvation sets in.
One aspect of sustainable development/UN agenda is the ever changing goal. In October, 2000 the USFWS raised the goal on the yard stick of sustainable development. In this case the terminology "ecological integrity" is used. The USFWS published a notice in the Federal Register: October 17, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 201) Page 61356-61362. The notice amended the management policy to include "Ecological Integrity".
"The USFWS proposes to establish an internal policy that will maintain the `'biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health' of the Refuge System. The holistic integration of these three qualities constitutes ecological integrity. The concept of ecological integrity requires a frame of reference for natural conditions. Our frame of reference extends from 800 AD to 1800 AD. The former date marked the beginning of an ecological transformation associated with higher temperatures; the latter approximates the advent of the industrial era, including drastic and widespread habitat loss. In areas where pre-industrial European settlement was particularly intensive, however, our frame of reference may be shorter. Natural conditions also include those that would have persisted or evolved to the present time if European settlement and industrialization had not occurred"
Returning the land to a condition that the bureaucrat determines is reflective of 800 AD to 1800 AD will be a nightmare in the making. As we have read, managing every aspect of life outside of the Refuge will be required, if "integrity" is to be maintained inside.
Of course geopolitical boundaries (state and county borders) will no longer be adequate. A new land map is required for the USFWS ecosystem approach. Watershed mapping is the new criteria utilized to divide the US. This new system has divided the US into 53 "ecosystems."
This map may be viewed at: http://offices.fws.gov/ecounits.html
How the USFWS will manage the newly formed Cahaba River National Wildlife Refuge and the five other National Refuges located in the state can be surmised by reading accounts of the USFWS actions.
John Taylor, an 80 year old resident of Mount Vernon, Virginia, may not build a small modular home on his lot to accommodate his wheelchair bound wife because the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) says it harms a bald eagle nest located 90 feet away.
The USFWS says it would allow Taylor to construct the home only if he agrees to several onerous conditions: 1) Contribute money to a salmon restoration plan because eagles like to eat salmon; 2) Build two eagle platforms; 3) Contribute money to a bald eagle exhibit. In addition, Taylor would not be permitted to mow his lawn or allow children to play on his lot between the months of November and July.
"There are a dozen houses around that nest," said Taylor. "I don't know why my government singled me out especially since I have done everything I can to protect that nest."
The USFWS's demands are also questionable since the agency recently announced that the bald eagle is no longer endangered.
In March 1999, Taylor filed a lawsuit against the agency seeking just compensation for the loss of his property under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment.
Hampstead, Maryland wanted to build a five mile bypass to ease traffic congestion on its main street. But researchers have discovered 18 bog turtles in a wetland that lies in the path of the proposed bypass. The four inch turtle was listed as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1997. The bypass project is now on hold because Dr. James Howard, a university biologist who has studied the turtles at the request of the state of Maryland, has recommended that engineers build a bridge across a small stream instead of filling it so that the turtles could use the stream to travel from one bog to another. Howard also wants to extend his investigation for at least one more year to determined if there are other turtles dwelling in wetlands along the proposed bypass route. Howard says the turtles need protected "corridors" so that they can breed with turtles from other bogs.
There are other examples of how the USFWS will play god in the lives of those unfortunate human resources that inhabit their domain. Due to space limitations we have listed only two.
Before we take a look at the next partner a brief explanation of the Wildlands Project is in order.
Reed F. Noss authored the Wildlands Project and the Patagonia magazine published the plan in the early 90s. The Project has published some information on its web-site. The address is www.twp.org . The USFWS and the Wildlands Project call for "ecosytem management". The management of the ecosystem by public/private partnerships will result in the realization of the Wildlands Project goal. That goal calls for "....a wilderness network (that) would dominate a region and thus would itself constitute the matrix, with human habitations being the islands." The "matrix" is divided into three areas: core (animal habitation only); buffer zones (entry by humans restricted to governmental approval); and, of course, the population zones (where the human resources will be maintained). How large is a region? Mr. Noss states: "I suggest that at least half of the land area of the 48 conterminous states should be encompassed in core reserves and inner corridor zones (essentially extensions of core reserves) within the next few decades." If the American people allow this plan to proceed, it will set aside 50% to the continent for core areas with 10% buffer zones and the remaining 40% for human habitation.
The Wildlands Project website list some of their supporters/colleagues. The Nature Conservancy is one of the organizations listed. They not only support the Wildlands Project, but their actions indicate they also support a new ethic - "deep ecology".
The eight principles of "deep ecology," as defined by Arne Naess and George Sessions and which at present provides the unifying principles of the deep ecology, are:
2. Richness and diversity of life-forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.
3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.
4. Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.
5. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.
6. Policies must therefore be changed. The changes in policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.
7. The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent worth) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.
8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to participate in the attempt to implement the necessary changes.
The third member of this public/private partnership is U.S. Alliance Coosa Pines. The company is one of twenty companies that have endorsed and are pledging compliance with Alabama Sustainable Forest Initiative. Due to space limitations The Mustard Seed will examine this aspect of Agenda 21 in a later issue.
Other areas of Alabama that will be affected by the USFWS "ecosystem management," are Bon Secour, Eufaula, Choctaw, Wheeler and a shared Wildlife Refuge with Mississippi called Grand Bay.